Forum:New welcome script
I've noticed that we seem to now be running a script that automatically "welcomes" people the second they make an edit to Memory Alpha. There are some problems with it that I think we need to discuss. First off, do we even want this? The script is incapable of recognizing legitimate edits vs vandalism, so it sends a "welcome" message literally thanking vandals for their contributions. As a test to prove the point, I vandalized my own user page as an anon. Behold, I was thanked for my contribution. Hell, I was specifically thanked for the vandalism I made to that user page, naming the page I vandalized! As I understood it, we used the welcome templates to welcome people, not thank vandals. The second problem is that this new system seems to randomly choose and give credit on the welcome to a specific user. While the contribution is logged as User:Wikia, the page is signed as having been done by User:Cleanse! Now, where does some script get off signing pages and claiming that a contribution was made by someone who had no involvement or consent in the action? I doubt Cleanse went out of his way to welcome and thank someone for vandalism. Do we really need, or even want this script? --OuroborosCobra talk 01:47, 29 March 2009 (UTC) :The script signs the welcome with the username of the last MA admin that made an edit on the site... so it's really not random, per se. Note that I'm not disagreeing, just informing. ;) -- Renegade54 02:10, 29 March 2009 (UTC) :: Indeed: description of Wikia Welcome tool. :: There have been several of "us" involved in discussing it with Sannse, and no real concerns came of it, otherwise we would have already had this topic on forum. :) (Also, here is the rollout message for those interested.) :: It, User:Wikia, does something that wikia wants for their sites and that we were never 100% good at doing: welcoming new users in hopes of getting more contributors. It was given "bot" feature to avoid "flooding" rc, and only has one function: welcoming new users. :: Vandalism is and always shall be an inevitability of this site/wikis in general – that's where admins and regular contributors can step in and add the appropriate warning, template, or block, as part of "usual business". --Alan 02:35, 29 March 2009 (UTC) Could we have the bot sign as something like "Memory Alpha Team" rather than claiming it is specific people who did not take any action, like Cleanse? --OuroborosCobra talk 02:41, 29 March 2009 (UTC) :: Wikia Welcome tool: "The talk page message is signed by the admin (or Wikia staff member) who's edited the wiki most recently, to help the contributor find someone who's available to talk to them if they need it." Since "Memory Alpha Team" doesn't exist as a user, it wouldn't be a very logical choice for the new user to consult. --Alan 02:45, 29 March 2009 (UTC) I don't see the logic in signing for someone who didn't do an action. Defeats the point of having a system where we sign our posts at all. Wikia justifying a bad feature doesn't stop making it bad. --OuroborosCobra talk 04:17, 29 March 2009 (UTC) :: It has nothing to do with "doing the action", it has to do with directing the new user to the most available administrator for the quickest source of wiki-related assistance. I hardly see that as "a bad feature", and in all honesty. It's not about giving credit, its about actually helping people and making this site a little more user friendly, instead of ignoring people until they do something wrong. --Alan 04:41, 29 March 2009 (UTC) No, that is not what the signature feature on Wikis is for. The signature feature is to identify who has left a post, and a time stamp of when. Cleanse did not leave that message, he did not say "welcome," a bot did. If I signed my post as "Cid Highwind" it would not be anymore right, were I directing someone to an admin or not. --OuroborosCobra talk 04:45, 29 March 2009 (UTC) :::If you were signing your messages using my name, it would be a deliberate disinformation on your part, because you will probably be signing a unique message that I didn't write. If the welcome-bot is doing it, it is trying to be helpful by directing the new user to the "next-best" admin, working under the (currently implicit, I admit) assumption that everyone from the group of admins is fine with his name being used for a standard welcome message we're using all the time, anyway. I really don't see any problem with that. :::However, the real problem might be that this action only makes sense under the assumption that the typical new user being welcomed knows how to contact someone who has signed a comment on his talk page. Can we really make that assumption? -- Cid Highwind 22:23, 29 March 2009 (UTC) I would put forward that using the signature from admins without their explicit permission is a diliberate action of disinformation on the part of Wikia as it implies a message being sent from that admin to that user/anon that the admin did not send, did not write. I also put forward that it is not needed. Our welcome template is already full of helpful links to users, and I don't see even the benefit of this "signature by someone who did not write or give consent" system. --OuroborosCobra talk 22:29, 29 March 2009 (UTC) :::Not trying to sound offensive... but I currently don't see anyone of the admin group complaining about that. Until that happens, why don't we just get along with it? -- Cid Highwind 22:37, 29 March 2009 (UTC) Lack of complaint does not make an action correct. This bot undermines the very purpose of the signature system, just as much as if I signed under your name, and sets a precedent for future Wikia actions "in the name of admins" who never actually gave their consent. --OuroborosCobra talk 22:44, 29 March 2009 (UTC) :::::I think I get what OuroborosCobra is trying to say, sure the idea behind it points to someone who can help, but said person might not necessarily he able or willing to help for various reasons. Therefor, you would most likely have someone seeking help and might not get an answer, which could in turn give the wrong impression of Memory Alpha itself. Personally, such a feature is annoying I think, as while it does help in welcoming certain people, it lacks a certain...personal touch to it, like Memory Alpha's message has (which also, as pointed out as several helpful links as a part of it). Not that it matters, but I've seen similar reactions to this new feature elsewhere, as again it doesn't offer the true welcome, or the helpful links (or names) originally intended by said wiki's staff. Also, in point, I can see what OuroborosCobra is saying in that, I'd rather my name not be signed in something unless I myself fully intended it to be there, or signed it myself. --Terran Officer 23:32, 29 March 2009 (UTC) ::::::I understand the desire to welcome new users and direct them to potential sources of help, but I think that benefit is outweighed by the inability to distinguish between legitimate edits and vandals. I can also understand Cobra's point about signatures, although I do think as an admin that its not terribly unreasonable to have ourselves put out there without our specific knowledge, but I do see his point. However, if I had to choose right now I would support turning that feature off, as it is ridiculous for us to be welcoming vandals.--31dot 00:53, 30 March 2009 (UTC) :::::::Seeing my name has been mentioned a few times here, I thought I'd weigh in. I find absolutely no problem with the welcome bot and think it is a great idea. Really, getting a welcome message from a bot or a person is not really any different, as they were never "personal" anyway (being a template and all). And this way ensures every new user gets all those nice intro links. :-) :::::::I also highly doubt vandals will read their talk page and then be spurred on to vandalise more because of an auto-welcome. If it's a one-off "test", they've already done it, and if they're intent on a spree it's not going to change anything. Admins can always step in to block the vandal who got a friendly welcome. :::::::Regarding consent: I, Cleanse, hereby authorise User:Wikia bot to use my name to welcome new users. There. :-p– Cleanse 01:17, 30 March 2009 (UTC) :::Let's be honest... while in the past, there were tons of new features implemented by Wikia that didn't work as expected, and made life harder for us rather than easier, this feature is not one of those. We do have the ability to turn it off, and we do have the ability to completely reword the welcome message so that it doesn't use the name of a recently active admin "as signature", but instead as a link in the text, as for example: ::::Currently, the administrator ''Cid Highwind is editing this wiki. Click on his name to access his "talk page", where you can add a message if you have further questions.'' :::This might in fact make more sense than a signature - not because the evil welcome-bot disinforms poor users, but because it is actually a clearer description of what a new contributor can do to get in contact with others. In any case, with this feature we're actually able to do all those changes we'd like, already. -- Cid Highwind 09:31, 30 March 2009 (UTC) I would support your proposed change there, as it would maintain the reason for having the admin signature without abusing the intended purpose of the signature system. That Wikia allows us to make this change does make it one of the better new features Wikia has added, and I tip my hat to them. --OuroborosCobra talk 09:38, 30 March 2009 (UTC) ::I think that's reasonable, too.--31dot 23:32, 31 March 2009 (UTC) :::::::::Wow, I didn't even know this discussion existed! Anyway, I don't really have time to read the whole discussion right now, so I apologize if I'm bringing up points that have already been brought up. Anyway, do we need this bot? No, not at all. If we want to welcome somebody, we can do it manually. Does it make sense to have this bot? No, not at all. As you can see, the bot has been welcoming any and all anonymous users, regardless of the edit. We should only welcome anons who have made a few, legit edits and show a definite interest in wanting the help with the encyclopedia. The bot is welcoming anons after just one edit (which, as one anon pointed out to me, is pretty silly). Above all, the bot has been welcoming vandals in addition to legitimate editors... and they're welcoming them in our name. That doesn't sit particularly well with me. So, long story short, the bot is pointless and useless. I blocked it for a few minutes yesterday when it was welcoming another vandal in my name, kind of as a joke and kind of out of irritation, until I could disable it. Apparently, doing so broke it. Well, I'm sorry about that to those who for some reason found the bot useful; it was not my intention to break it. Should I have asked? Probably, but I was too irritated and rushed to think about it. I apologize for that and for seemingly breaking the bot, but to be completely honest... good riddance. :) --From Andoria with Love 13:05, 14 April 2009 (UTC) ::I'm admittedly still not took keen on this bot, for some of the reasons Shran stated, but would there be a way to change it so that it did not welcome users until they have made a few edits?--31dot 13:16, 14 April 2009 (UTC) Update Update on Shran's surly actions. Basically what he did actually caused a bug to creep out. The auto-welcome still occurs and is put in a queue but the queue marks it as successful before it's written to the database...so...it's been ticketed and will be fixed whenever they get around to it... — Morder 20:53, 14 April 2009 (UTC) : It's unfortunate the damned thing didn't just have an "off" switch...oh wait...well, it's a good thing MA isn't experiencing an influx of new users because there is no upcoming production on the cusp of premiering...oh wait... Thanks Shran... --Alan 21:01, 14 April 2009 (UTC) ::Even smarter would have been to simply change the message. Or investigate. Or ask. *sigh* -- sulfur 21:15, 14 April 2009 (UTC) :::Yeah, that'd be why I created this thread, so it could be discussed and something agreed upon. Bad Shran :-P :::That said, it seems we definitely do not have unanimous support from all of the administrators about their names being used, in fact we have some pretty vocal opposition. Earlier on we had a suggested modification that would take admin signatures out of the bot. How about we implement that? --OuroborosCobra talk 21:21, 14 April 2009 (UTC) : Just because someone doesnt understand something doesnt make it bad or wrong. Clearly, in this most recent "incident", a certain lack of understanding still remains. --Alan 21:24, 14 April 2009 (UTC) :::The only lack of understanding I see is on technical function. The actual question of using the bot the way it currently is, signing for administrators, multiple admins have said they don't want. Who the hell is Wikia to start signing for people who do not want to be? --OuroborosCobra talk 21:30, 14 April 2009 (UTC) Sulfur agreed to have his name on the signature based on his edit. Though the intended purpose is for the new users to be able to contact the most recent (and presumably active) admin if they have questions. — Morder 21:32, 14 April 2009 (UTC) :::31dot and Shran did not agree to have their names used. One of them even went as far as unilateral protest action. --OuroborosCobra talk 21:35, 14 April 2009 (UTC)